http://technabob.com/blog/wp-content...miyo_mario.jpgQuote:
Originally Posted by jasong
Printable View
http://technabob.com/blog/wp-content...miyo_mario.jpgQuote:
Originally Posted by jasong
Well that settles it then!
I'm not even sure what you're getting at here. How can you engage in a dialog concerning the matters I outlined above without an implicit recognition that what you're evaluating is an art form? I'm not talking about a rudimentary marks-out-of-five sort of review score aggregation - you can review whatever you feel like. A discussion of the means by which videogaming conveys narrative for instance - its strengths, weaknesses and potential - is inevitably infringing onto sacrosanct territory if you can't just acknowledge, as I said, a priori, that it's an art form.Quote:
Originally Posted by Azimuth
What I don't understand is what exactly is WRONG with recognizing videogaming as an art form? As densweep pointed out, if you wanted to discuss the Sistine Chapel for instance, but you couldn't discuss it as art, all you'd have to talk about are the kinds of paintbrushes he used, the angles of the ceiling, the age and history of its creation, restorations, and so forth - missing the heart of the creation itself. Or if you could do, please tell me how - perhaps I'm missing something.
I'm Copy-Pasting all this. Gonna make me a novel, sell it for 10 billion US$ and pay you each a Happy Meal In Royalties.
:p Just like tetris hey.
Depending on which side of the fence you are, is it art? Do you care?Quote:
Originally Posted by Maplassie
I just want to shoot people in the head with my R700. Don't care if it's art or not :P
As long as you sign your name in the blood, you can call it art.Quote:
Originally Posted by Maplassie
Nope don't care.
You've still not substantiated this.Quote:
Originally Posted by jasong
And you continue to contradict yourself. During the course of this discussion, you've suggested that:
1. Only some games could be considered art.
2. It matters that we are able to consider games as art.
3. It doesn't matter if we can consider games as art.
4. We can't critically evaluate games without first presuming they're a form of art, disingenuously avoiding the logical inference that, without first presuming they're a a form of art, we're entirely unable to critically evaluate them.
It's the last part I find especially absurd. And, as I've pointed out several times in this discussion already, IF WE CAN'T ABSOLUTELY DEFINE WHAT CONSTITUTES ART, HOW CAN WE EVALUATE ANYTHING AS "ART", ANYWAY?
I think you lack imagination.Quote:
What I don't understand is what exactly is WRONG with recognizing videogaming as an art form? As densweep pointed out, if you wanted to discuss the Sistine Chapel for instance, but you couldn't discuss it as art, all you'd have to talk about are the kinds of paintbrushes he used, the angles of the ceiling, the age and history of its creation, restorations, and so forth - missing the heart of the creation itself. Or if you could do, please tell me how - perhaps I'm missing something.
I'm going to go ahead and stop reading this thread. I'm finding myself googling more words than I have ever done in my life :|
And you continue to contradict yourself. During the course of this discussion, you've suggested that:
I didn't suggest that. I said that every game is art to some degree because the definition of art per se is very encompassing - that in itself isn't interesting or remarkable; but very few games achieved a level of greatness in artistry.Quote:
1. Only some games could be considered art.
It matters that we're able to discuss them as an art form yes, more than just as a form of entertainment.Quote:
2. It matters that we are able to consider games as art.
In the sense that I don't particularly care about recognition by some elite establishment, yes. In any other sense, no, not at all. And that was mainly in response to your accusation that the reason I maintain that games should be considered art is because I'm too intellectually insecure to just enjoy them as games, which is nonsense.Quote:
3. It doesn't matter if we can consider games as art.
I'd rather say that by definition, as I understand it, any serious critical discourse about gaming as a form of creative medium is an artistic analysis; and avoiding that fact because you take issue with terminology is actually disingenuous and unnecessary.Quote:
4. We can't critically evaluate games without first presuming they're a form of art, disingenuously avoiding the logical inference that, without first presuming they're a a form of art, we're entirely unable to critically evaluate them.
We don't have to define what constitutes art - any dictionary definition will do; and gaming satisfactorily passes those criteria.Quote:
It's the last part I find especially absurd. And, as I've pointed out several times in this discussion already, IF WE CAN'T ABSOLUTELY DEFINE WHAT CONSTITUTES ART, HOW CAN WE EVALUATE ANYTHING AS "ART", ANYWAY?
K - perhaps I do?Quote:
I think you lack imagination.
Google just asked me if I would like to order a dictionary rather than look up another word?
haha it's healthy for you :D
This is not substantiation; it's an opinion.Quote:
Originally Posted by jasong
I'm over arguing this topic with you. I'm increasingly of the impression that you simply cannot hear anyone else over the sound of how awesome you (think you) are.
<troll>
Azimuth, your a women. You're argument is invalid!
</troll>
I'm so getting my ass kicked for this hey? :P
It's totally true. I'll get back to baking those cookies, Voicy.
PS. "you're". Peasant.
Mmmmmm Cookies! *om nom nom* Yeah get back to the kitchen. /slaps on ass ... or whatever it is jocks do.Quote:
Originally Posted by Azimuth
PS. I swapped "you're/your" and added womEn instead of womAn.
PPS. Highlight the hidden text. :)
I'm biding my time.
Just biding my time.
I sorry, I sorry :(Quote:
Originally Posted by Azimuth
Look, I brings you a puppy...
http://drkatesview.files.wordpress.c...uppy-pic55.jpg
We're cool, right? .... right?
Maybe I could give an example of the kind of dialog I'm referring to?Quote:
Originally Posted by Azimuth
http://www.next-gen.biz/blogs/its-been-emotional
Here's a blog written by a veteran gaming critic, analyzing a particular feature of gaming - notice he specifically uses the term 'art':
Now, even if he hadn't used the terminology, the nature of his analysis would still be an artistic one, just intrinsically. He didn't have to establish whether the games were art, but he analysed them as art - a key distinction.Quote:
One may cry at the most meretricious and manipulative Hollywood scene featuring a dog or small child, but that doesn’t prove it’s a work of art. Conversely, I did not weep while watching Apocalypse Now or reading The Master And Margarita. Why is crying thought superior to, or more authentic than, laughing, or feeling terrified, or joyously triumphant, or experiencing what I have argued is the central emotional territory of many of the best videogames, the emotion of aesthetic wonder?
It's fine I can just carry on this debate without you guys
http://behance.vo.llnwd.net/profiles...1244415174.jpg